Discussion in 'Royal Signals' started by snotrag, Oct 7, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I have noticed on a couple of threads the mention of the amalgamation of IS/SYS.

    There was a meeting with the brass a couple of weeks ago.

    It is not happening now.

    IS will now be streamed into specialist areas. All guys out of IS training will be LCpl.

    WO in trade for IS has just been granted for a few and is now the way forward apparently.

    I would advice anyone joing Signals to join IS at the mo. Alot of the guys that have been promoted on Fri where promoted on one recommend and mediocre performance.

    There are a lot of slots and not enough guys! A nice equation. SO GRAB IT!
  2. I'm not sure "WO in trade" will ever be a recognised path, but the Corps has used WO's with the right skill sets to fill posts "in trade" for years. Why WO though? If this is an in trade post, why does it have to be a WO, if the post has no management responsibility why would it need to be a Warrant. I understand fully why it is inappropriate for a Supvr to fill and in trade post without supervisory duties, but if the job can be filled by a Full Screw with the right skills then why not?

    Until any of this is briefed through SOinC's as Corps Policy, i wont hold my breath. As it stands, its another rumour fuelling an already vibrant Corps rumour control.
  3. Be interested to see where you got this information from? Because seeing I was talking to people this past week, people who make the decision, they are still hell bent on amalgamating the trades in 2008.

    I am not saying you are incorrect, just interested where you rumour has come from.
  4. Nah - the corps has put too many resources into selecting Supvr IS on the basis as the other supervisory trades. I also hear that all the armoured brigades are about to get Supvrs IS on their respective books, although I'm not personally convinced that they have sufficient IS to justify it yet.

    What are we doing tonight Q?
    Same thing we do every night, Sig Bloggs, trying to take over the world!
  5. From an armoured Bde perspective there is no IS, if you can call ComBat IS... There is a lot of talk to bring the App Specs all into the R Signals and that is a personal view of the current SoinC, and I can see that causing a big bun fight. We presently have 1 App Spec who is capbadged Signals and all he does is ComBat and data input of Op orders and the like for Bde staff.
  6. Bde has ATacCS IT systems. Just cos most don't use it, doesn't mean its not there.

    Also when J1J4 IOS comes in beginning of next year it will be down to Unit level, not just Bde. So good idea if the Bde dealt with it on behalf of all units in the Bde.
  7. What you will find at most Bdes especially Armoured ones and the ones that have been through digitisation is that these systems can not be pushed down to unit level as there is no bearer to carry aforementioned systems. All platforms that have been bowmanised lose the capability of Ptarmigan as it is ripped out and not re-installed, so how is this system going to passed to Bde level never mind unit level?
  8. Three guys from 16 SIg Regt are getting promoted from SSgt to WO2 next week and are IS Engr.

    There are a lot of non-supervisory IS posts out there that need filling. I know that it causes a bit of discomfort in some corners to have 'WO2 in Trade' but if there is a requirement so be it.

    There are guys that are SSgt after only being in 10 years and not been selected for IS SUpvr, at least they have a chance of further promotion and the army benefits from their skills.

    As I have said before its very exciting times in the IS trade and there is someting to be had for everyone in the Royal Signals if they choose the right path.
  9. Why would someone need to be a Warrant Officer to fill these posts? How can there be a stronger argument for IS in-trade than there is for Tech in-trade? Would these people be on high pay band? If so, there would be no incentive for guys to people to go for Supervisory selection. All this can do is reverse the huge prgress made by Supvrs out in the field army.
  10. I agree with you CS!! The IS rosta already somewhat lacking in credibility and this can only further undermine this!!
  11. They use a new communications system to the Royal Signals. The RLC have been using it for a few years, and it has been enhanced and is part of the J1J4 IOS system. With each computer LAN comes a wireless comms system. These transmit to a central comms hub which has a Bantam satelite link back to the UK. Its basically running secure wi-fi over the operational area.

    It is a requirement to allow JPA in the field which has to be provided to allow people access to their pay records whilst on operations. When its fully up and running, all personnel in any unit should be able to gain access to JPA wherever they are in the world.
  12. Timebandit - there are also plenty of FofS and YofS who are crap too, remember. Present company excluded of course.

    That JPA info is interesting. One might suggest that there are parallels between the Supvr IS and YofS in a Bde sig sqn, except one is the Bowman formation manager and the Supvr is responsible for the controlling all the IS stuff like JPA, J1J4 IOS and so on. I don't necessarily agree, mind you, but any such parallels are certainly worth discussion. The FofS can look after the repair and inspection schedule eh?
  13. I like fishing for a bite!!! True what you say about YofS and FofS too!! The FofS will just as you say look after the G4 side of life or at least he does in the Bde I work in, but as you say it will certainly be interesting to see if all of the above do come in and who will manage them.
  14. You can manage all that stuff, while I spend all day surfing IGS as usual.
  15. Nothing new there then 8O